For assistance with presenting a case for wrongful foreclosure or to challenge whoever is taking your money every month, please call 520-405-1688, customer service, who will put you in touch with an attorney in the states of Florida, Tennessee, Georgia, California, Ohio, and Nevada. (NOTE: Chapter 11 may be easier than you think).

Editor’s Analysis: Lawyers and Homeowners like to curse out the judicial system every time they get a decision they don’t like. The Pino case is one of them. “HOMEOWNERS LOSE” is the headline across the board in all media. Homeowners did not lose. Civil procedure won, and the homeowners were, once again, on the wrong side of it, although they were inadvertently encouraged by the Florida Supreme Court who took jurisdiction even after the case was dismissed and settled.

My guess is that the justices who decided to take the case thought there was some meat in there that would prevent false claims in court. This court, composed of progressive judges, was clearly looking for a way to chastise the banks for filing forged, false, fabricated and misleading documents. After reviewing it, they realized they couldn’t do that without throwing the whole judicial system out of whack — something that didn’t bother the banks but does bother the Supreme Court of any state.

But in every opinion that seems negative to homeowners there are oft-ignored instructions on how to do it right. Here we have Tom Ice, attorney for the homeowner and a competent one at that, against David Stern’s operation that was so dirty his own investors sued him for selling them a bunch of crap. Stern’s firm was known to have a full fledged document fabrication and forgery system which was used with impunity because once they got caught they dismissed the claim.

The issue taken up by the Florida Supreme Court was whether the Court could retain jurisdiction of a case that was dismissed and settled for the sole purpose of punishing a party who lied or submitted false documents into evidence. Much as the court probably would have liked to impose kangaroo justice on the banks and Stern, it reluctantly concluded that it just didn’t have the power (jurisdiction) to do that. To say otherwise would make every voluntary dismissal non-final. Thus any settlement would never be final.

Ice is wrong when he says that the Supreme Court doesn’t care about fraud in the judicial system. They cared enough to take a shot at stopping it with an ill-advised grab at jurisdiction to end this madness. We can’t change the law, the rules of procedure or the laws of evidence to suit the result we think should be the outcome. We are required, in a nation of laws, to arrive at the destination of justice using existing law and procedure. There is little doubt that the Florida Supreme court is very concerned about fraud in the judicial system and that it will do something about it as soon as the the existing laws and rules allow it.

There is a hidden good message in this decision. If the party who committed the fraud got nothing as a result of it, then the dismissal cannot be reversed. THAT is precisely the center of gravity of the homeowner defense: the banks did get millions of homes submitting fraudulent documents and therefore are subject to various causes of action for having done so. In addition, the fact that the original transaction, for the most part, was never supported by consideration, making both the note invalid and nullifying the illusion of a lien imposed by the mortgage, means that the homeowner who attacks directly the basic premises of the foreclosure action using established law and procedure will be greeted by a friendly audience a the Florida Supreme Court. The headline should have been “Florida Supreme Court Opens door to damage claims for fraudulent documents.”

In short, the borrowers didn’t lose and the Court, far from being unsympathetic to the light of borrowers made that abundantly clear:

“Because Pino sought no other available sanctions, and the case has since been resolved between the parties, we need not reach the question of whether the trial court should be able to award monetary sanctions under the circumstances of this case. We therefore approve the result reached by the Fourth District affirming the trial court’s denial of Pino’s motion.

“While affirming the decision of the Fourth District, we also understand the concerns of those who discuss the multiple abuses that can occur from fraudulent pleadings being filed with the trial courts in this state. While rule 1.420(a)(1) has well served the litigants and courts of this state, we request the Civil Procedure Rules Committee review this concern and make a recommendation to this Court regarding whether (a) explicit sanction authority should be provided to a trial court pursuant to rule 1.110(b), even after a case is voluntarily dismissed, (b) rule 1.420(a)(1) should be amended to expressly allow the trial court to retain jurisdiction to rule on any pending sanction motions that seek monetary sanctions for abuses committed by either party during the litigation process, or to allow the trial court explicit authority to include attorney’s fees in any award to a party when the dismissed action is reinstated, or (c) to adopt a rule similar to Federal Rule 11 to provide explicit authority for the trial court to impose sanctions.”

66 Responses

US Bank and SN Servicing has submitted Forged documents in our federal bankruptcy case too and we will never stop perusing them in court for damages. We are also asking our Federal judge to prosecute their current attorney out of Jacksonville Florida who continued to defend this case knowing that forged document are before a federal court. All the offending parties at SN Servicing and their attorneys are committing a serious crime against our country. We have filed a formal complaint with the FBI and the US attorney general and many great Judges all across this nation are finally stopping them from this kind of fraud on American families. US Bank and SN servicing and their attorneys are also violating a serious consent order that was to protect the people from these crimes but they could care less. Please feel free to have your clients join a class action suit so that we can end their behavior with a multi billion dollar punitive damage suit. Join us, call Ray Shelton in Florida at 352 274 8467

Plaintiff must serve all parties on public record before a tax sale. The plaintiff could serve for example …. MERS, CW and itself as defendants. hahaha Wink! In a case where only MERS is listed … well then… its a free for sumbuddy.

@guest – sorry, I don’t get your questions – I don’t get what happened, so I can only say that I think if the first plaintiff dismissed before the homeowner did a thing, that deal is dead and may have no bearing on any action by anyone else later and maybe no impact on the same plaintiff. Not enough info to weigh in.

John, you are correct about the failure to file SJ by Pino. Now think outside Pino. What if the 1st plaintiff was not really note holder/owner or the mortgagee of record? What if they filed when there was no default and then voluntary dismissed the case without the defendant ever answering the complaint? What if that 1st plaintiff is now a zombie. Did MERS reserect it?

Millions of Americans are uninformed about what is going on in the courts and in all levels of this Government. None of this is moral, just, legal or ethical.

Too many refuse to see they let this evil in and this evil needs to be eradicated, wiped off the face of the earth.

This truly is the face of one evil that wears many disguises. WE THE PEOPLE are being sized up to see what we will allow.

These personages are very evil entities and are not who they appear to be. They have no respect for the Creator or his creations. That is why these entities are attacking our moral fabric, our Constitutional Republic. The real war is first and foremost a spiritual war on our morality.

Many of US did not recognize this evil because it wore many clever disguises. We were too trusting or distracted, or gullible and we let our guard down and we unknowingly let this evil in.

While we were busy and not paying attention this entity was incredibly busy at seeking to destroy US.

As a result of all of the lacsidaisicalness by US, we are now left to fend for our Constitutional Republic on our own.

WE THE PEOPLE have to make a stand for our own moral beliefs and it is up to all of US to show this evil the door.

No one can or will do that for US.

First we need to stop feeding this evil beast of totalitarianism and it begins when we get our own moral houses in order.

Working to be paymasters to slavemasters is not moral or just.

They all need to be put in check by US.

We ALL need to say NO…We will not cooperate, conform, comply or participate in this tyranny being waged by these oppressors.

No excuses, time we cleaned up our act and we stopped cooperating and doing business with this evil.

I just looked at the video guest linked from Weidner about Pino and the new legis the banksters want. I can’t speak to that because I haven’t read the proposal. But I can reiterate that as far as I can tell, voluntary
dismissal is not an option when a mtn for sj is pending or an answer has been filed. It looks to me like if Pino had filed a mtn for sj along with his mtn for sanctions, that would have precluded the bankster from voluntarily dismissing – and Pino didn’t do that. Put in its darker reality, if I got a pending sj right, he blew it. Yes, it stinks that he had to beat them to the punch, but there it is. And I still don’t believe there’s no good remedy for any fraud committed in the first action which the bankster dismissed even if it requires a new action or a counter – action to the bankster’s second complaint against Pino. Lordy, what cheek!

Evil is a cunning seducer…. Evil is clever but evil always conceals itself. Evil always lies and deceives. Knowing the truth about who evil is and what evil wants is perfection. Evil is the control freak of totalitarianism and what evil wants is to completely control and devour our Constitutional Republic. Don’t feed evil.

You’re gonna have to narrow it down a bit… The case your mentioned is a 1913 thing sourceoftitle was referring to. Didn’t see it applied to anything more recent. I’m all for helping you out but wild goose isn’t my thing.

I am not speaking for others living in Florida..but what I have seen and heard is to the point beyond disgusting of all the courts and the fraudster bankers that camp and cozy up to the bunch of lying legislators in Tallahassee…whining for help as they all are aware of the frauds and the courts are just as guilty…disorganize the court system to accommodate the criminals…is that Justice ? The oath they all took is not worth the toilet paper they use…its a fake front…the courts and the banker plaintiffs are the real reason for court backlogs…all trying ways to slam the people..overlooking what has already been proven with facts…no standing means shit…anything the defendants prove means shit..yet the bankers cannot prove with facts that they own the loans and have a right to foreclose…Go sit in the courts…and see what goes on…shocking….as you start to speak if your lucky….the 5 minutes is up….until next hearing…..in the mean time the bankers are back begging for mercy…..and the wheel keeps turning…..

Christine, anyone: I just noticed at sourceoftitle, which by the way often has very interesting articles, that the Wisconsin SC recently made a ruling – something about tax assessments and no lender address on the recorded docs so there is avoidance of the loan by the taxing authority. I can’t find the decision. You’re pretty good at that. Can you get it? thanks

BOA, buttwipe #2 kept all your money in a suspense account (default) and tried to cover up what buttwipe #1 CW did. So to fc they go all the way back to the origional default date… like in 08 09 10 and try to fc in dead buttwipes name because the LPs were never released …. althou the voluntary Judicial dismissals were. They were bound to get caught carring these loans on their books … for awhile playing hot potato ever so ofter worked …. eventually a homeowner was going to sell or transfer title to another and they were going to get caught.

JG re: Pino case ….. On Thursday, the Florida Supreme Court decided that it could not, unless the plaintiff – in this case, the bank – had obtained some kind of affirmative relief, and the dismissal had kept the fraud from being remedied by the court.
………………………… What if the plaintiff in the first fraud had obtained affirmitive relief and the voluntary dismissal kept the fruad from being remedied by the court as in our case? On Thursday, the Florida Supreme Court decided that it could not, unless the plaintiff – in this case, the bank – had obtained some kind of affirmative relief, and the dismissal had kept the fraud from being remedied by the court.

The trust rested the the day the FED went into default. Split claims…? What a bunch of jokers & thieves …. What did the U.S. Supreme Court rule on separation of the mortgage & note….? Not a word from the cowards in the media. They would rather talk about non-issues like analyze Obamas stupid skeet shooting photo ….What does it all mean….? DUH….IT MEANS YOU ARE A USELESS IDIOT & A MORON…..Like wall to wall coverage of the blizzard on the East Coast is news. What the hell…? Like these people never saw snow before….The snows piling up by the minute…..well no shit Sherlock….! They actually pay you money for talking b.s. day & night…?…I hope these 24 hour news freak shows get canned…& these freaking morons in the media all get life in a foreign prison…preferably somewhere in Siberia..

@JG, I am not re-opening a thing. I didnt create the problem and I am not responsible for fixing it. If they cant fix it after 12 months and still want to act like greedy buttwipes. Oh Well.. 5yrs is 4yrs to late. As far as further damages and a lawsuit go, the attorneys do not advise it.

That’s right on JG….you tell these imposter crooks, there are a few of US patriots who slipped through the cracks WHO “get it”….thank God. ….and WE U.S. PATRIOTS ARE NOT taking their b.s. THERE WILL BE NO BANKSTER DUMPSTER DIVING ON OUR WATCH..

So, Mr. Weidner, what rule of law is dead by Pino that you should tout its death as an oppressive fact? I do believe the court’s interpretation was tweaked, but the homeowner was not without remedy when the fraud, if it were fraud, was discovered, and did nothing at the time.
Granted, most of us would think filing a mtn for sanctions was a good idea. But maybe a counter-suit would have been a better idea to keep the issue of fraud alive. Or an omnibus motion for sj and sanctions when the fraud was discovered. I’m not sure because I’m not an attorney. Yeah, I think it’s a load that for the poss oversight, Pino has to face those curmudgeons again and that they feel comfortable going before the court again, but like I said, I’m not sure the fat lady is singing as to fraud just because the old case wasn’t re-opened. Pino can file a counter-action now in BONY’s second show and since its the same venue, the court may certainly take JN of the fraud, right?
I’m sorry for Pino for sure. But this can be a lesson for the rest of us.

As to the rule of law which is dead, what the court actually decided imo
is whether or not under certain conditions voluntary dismissal is a right and whether or not fraud on the court is a good enough reason to
vacate the dismissal later. The court app found it isn’t. I disagree because the dismissal was clearly to avoid what BONY had coming and an abuse of what I think is a privilege but the FL SC finds a right. What are YOUR arguments that the rule of law is dead????

What I get is this: in Florida, if the SC is going to rule that vol dismissal is sacrosanct with rare exception, then one has to get in one’s own deal, like a mtn for sj, before the bankster can do that. Also, one needs to know to a certainty where that circuit stands on vol dismissal and RJ.

I’m staying on this Pino case so that people don’t end up thinking a bankster may commit fraud on the court and abuse of process and then just voluntarily dismiss to avoid the ramifications of their misdeeds. Because that’s what it looks like. I finally found the actual FL SC 2013 decision and thought it was a tortured interpretation of FL statute. I liked the dissenter’s straight-up take on the relevant statute much better. Without trying to write a book, I’ll just say that when the bankster filed a notice of voluntary withdrawal in the first action, Pino apparently didn’t do anything. Not sure what he could have done at THAT point, since the SC found voluntary dismissal to be an unabridgeable right, way I got it.
Pino only alleged the fraud when BONY filed it’s second action. After the original dismissal, he probably thought he had them. In fairness, who wouldn’t? He was probably also very relieved and thought it was over. It wasn’t. BONY Mellon just came back 5 mos. later. Long and short, I guess, is one has to find a way to preserve sanctions, even if it means filing a counter-action and preserve them therein to get real resolution in case the bankster tries to voluntarily dismissal its own action (which imo is far less likely with a counter-claim pending). If one doesn’t do SOMEthing strategically, unless a particular venue finds res j to apply to one voluntary dismissal, banksters will in fact be allowed to pull any number of stunts and get away with it because they will have nothing to lose.
I thought the decision was bull. One reason is because while it makes a case that dismissal is dismissal, end of story in the lower court, the dismissal by the parties (Pino and BONY) in the higher court still found the higher court with the jurisdiction it found the lower court to be without for the very same reason! Twisted! The FL SC seemed to be saying, also, that the lower court didn’t have jurisdiction to consider a motion to re-open a case….. Well, now actually, the mtn filed was not that – it was factually a mtn to vacate the dismissal, I think.

Another is because it relled on an alleged clerical error in another case to 86 a dismissal with prejudice while it wouldn’t rec fraud on the court as a reason for the lower court to vacate a dismissal without prejudice. The SC’s justification was that in case 1, it was the dismisser who sought relief and in case 2 (Pino), it’s the non-dismissing party. Bah. So Pino can at least be a lesson for the rest of us: don’t get beat to the punch. Find a lawyer who can implement some strategy. I’ve only made some lay shots at what that might look like. And I’m still not convinced some form of retribution for the fraud if proved is out of reach.

JG….everyone is not uninformed. The courts are corrupt and acting like a tyranny…they are not following the RULE OF LAW.

Whether the American people are uniformed or not, the courts are NOT FOLLOWING EVEN THE BASIC STATE & FEDERAL LAW REQUIREMENTS TO BRING THESE FC SUITS….. THE UCC IS THE RULE OF LAW GOVERNING BANKS AND THE UCC IN TURN, GOVERNS FORECLOSURES..

THE POLITICIANS, LAW ENFORCEMENT & THE JUDICIARY ARE TREATING THE CITIZENS WHO PAY FOR EVERYTHING IN THIS COUNTRY LIKE THEIR POSSESSIONS AND THEIR SUBJECTS INSTEAD OF WHO WE ARE…..

WE THE PEOPLE ARE THE REAL OWNERS OF THIS COUNTRY BECAUSE WE PAY TAXES…..

I said a voluntary dismissal may not be granted after a mtn for sj or an answer has been filed. it appears the real reasoning behind a court not allowing a voluntary dismissal is one of fairness (you heard it here first) to the defendant. The attached case doesn’t speak to a post-
dismissal motion for sanctions, but it’s instructive on why and when courts shouldn’t allow a voluntary dismissal and it may lead to arguments under 60? for reconsideration of the allowance for vol dismissal. In the case below, the plaintiff danced with the court and the def for two years and when things weren’t looking good, moved to dismiss (it may be, as to this case, dispositive, tho, that the def had a mtn for sj o/standing). The court said nay and wouldn’t allow the plaintiff to dismiss:

I guess it’s fair to say I’m annoyed that anyone takes the position the law as it is doesn’t provide relief to those harmed by bad actors, that we’re helpless, because we’re not. We’re just uninformed. ( I have to acknowledge that some laws were changed in the banksters’ favor while we were sleeping, tho. Not ones applicable here. We all know I’m not an attorney, but I’m wondering what would have happened differently if when the bankster sought to voluntarily dismiss, the homeowner had filed an opposition along with a mtn for summary judgment arguing sj was more appropriate -or- had preserved earlier in the case the issue of sanctions on a finding at a later date that sanctions were warranted? Or filed a counter-suit and preserved them therein? I think there are a lot of things we can do but we don’t know what they are. We need our own stinking white papers – at least the attorneys involved in homeowner defense do.
But one way or another, I’m happy to see that at least some courts are applying res j to voluntary dismissals and precluding a claimant from playing the phoenix.

LOU DOBBS SAID WHEN HE HEARD BIDEN REFER TO U.S. CITIZENS AS THE PUBLIC HE WAS APPALLED…..HE SAID THAT IS ORWELLIAN……GUEST SAID THAT IS BECAUSE THE POLITICIANS DON’T CONSIDER US INDIVIDUALS ……CALL IT COLLECTIVISM OR COMMUNITY ORGANIZISM IT IS COMMUNISM…..

MAY I GO ONE STEP FURTHER….IT IS MUCH WORSE THAN THAT IT IS TOTALITARIANISM DISGUISED AS SOCIAL JUSTICE THEORIES…..

POLITICIANS MANDATING OBAMACARE & WHAT KIND OF GUNS WE CAN OWN IS TOTALITARIANISM ……IT IS NOT LEGAL….

LOU DOBBS SAID WE BETTER BE CAREFUL ABOUT HOW THE POLITICIANS ARE “EXHAUSTING” ALL OTHER OPTIONS BECAUSE BY DOING THAT THEY MAY BE EXHAUSTING OUR LEGACY……

guest , what I found out is , that I had two mortgages on my report for 6 months (overlap ) , when I was denied on a new loan. .One bank wrote the mortgage to long in the report ,when the other took over. After I send it to the Attorney General ,the removed (AHMSI) from the report , because I never had any business with them. So now I will get the lawyers some work.

Pocket full of credit & investment fraud…ashes…ashes…they are all going to burn down….figuratively of course, but none the less, they are ALL going to burn down. The FED OWNERS are BLOWING THEMSELVES UP by bankrupting the American people via the traitor politicians and when the American people REFUSE TO PAY for a QUADRILLION DOLLARS in CREDIT & INVESTMENT FRAUD….CREATED BY THE CREDIT & INVESTMENT WHORE BANKS ON WALL STREET…I WOULDN’T WANT TO BE THE OWNERS OF THESE BANKS OR THESE TRAITOR POLITICIANS…..WHEN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE STOP COOPERATING WITH THESE TOTALITARIAN DICTATORS……THE BANKSTERS & THE ENTIRE GLOBE ARE TOAST..

I guess I’m blind in one eye and can’t see out of the other. The article I cited says what I said it did – (an INvoluntary dismissal – I didn’t misquote) – but I treated it as if if read Voluntary dismissal. However, the article does go on to say that courts are applying res judicata to Voluntary dismissals.

NG said:
“Much as the court probably would have liked to impose kangaroo justice on the banks and Stern, it reluctantly concluded that it just didn’t have the power (jurisdiction) to do that. *
To say otherwise would make every voluntary dismissal non-final. Thus any settlement would never be final.”
*jg: Hmmm….I don’t believe it. I believe the lower court had the power – or could have. Rule 105 comes to mind and it may be implemented sua sponte, altho I see the reasoning findng it must be done before dismissal is granted. Still, there must be something to be done about these abuses of process post – dismissal.

NG said:

“We are required, in a nation of laws, to arrive at the destination of justice using existing law and procedure.”

jg: yes. now let’s have some.

NG said:

“There is little doubt that the Florida Supreme court is very concerned about fraud in the judicial system and that it will do something about it as soon as the the existing laws and rules allow it.”

jg: I don’t believe the system AS IS doesn’t provide for sanctions or other penalties to those who come before the court and are dishonest, regardless of voluntary dismissal. But, no, I can’t prove it’s otherwise. And aren’t there times when dismissal is NOT an option? Haven’t I read that in some rule? What I’m saying is I think there’s a time in a proceeding when one may successfully contest a voluntary dismissal. Anyone? Further, why couldn’t one contest the vol dismissal and seek sanctions during the arguments on dismissal or some-bloody-where in the act preserve a request for sanctions?
Would preservation of a request for sanctions or whatnot at a later date have changed anything? And more, as a logical matter, I’m hard pressed to understand how a court is relieved of authority to punish for bad acts, fraud on the court, and abuse of process which have already occurred simply because a claimant now says “oops. we we’re just kidding.” Even if I can’t support it, I just don’t believe a claimant may avoid its bad acts by a voluntary dismissal. Maybe that’s just the way it is – snoozed, you losed.

Cursory search turned up Rules 41, 23, and 66** on voluntary dismissals. Also, if one blew it and the case got voluntarily dismissed and I’m wrong and no rules would support post-dismissal sanctions, why not file a new action based on abuse of process whatever?

**41 seems to me to say no vol dismissal may be granted after the defendant has filed either an answer or a mtn for SJ: Strategy.
Clues: The ‘Pensiero Rule’ and ‘supervisory rule’ may have to be overcome when seeking post-dismissal judgment sanctions. I’m just saying things might have been done differently in the Pino case – or
there are yet arguments to make because I don’t believe vol
dismissal expunges sins.
As to the ramifications of voluntary dismissal and the bankster just coming back later, the article below is informative:

Among other things, it discusses res judicata as to voluntary dismissals and says this:

“Unless the order of dismissal or a statute of the State, otherwise specifies, AN INVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL of an action, other than a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, for improper venue, or for failure to join an indispensable party, OPERATES AS AN ADJUDICATION UPON THE MERITS.
That’s important imo to note because a dismissal based on a Motion to dismiss (v. voluntary dismissal) does NOT act as adjudication on the merits (unlike a granted mtn for SJ), way I got it. Voluntary dismissal = res judicata. So even if Pino loses his sanctions,
he may still end up with his home (though with messed up title without some kind of quiet title action). A good attorney would know if his best bet is to file a mtn to re-open the case to deal with the quiet title or instead file a new action(?), whichever leaves the
banksters with less defenses. Wouldn’t it be a new action because if you re-open the vol dismissed case, you would lose res j?

I got a tad off track here trying to find support for sanctions after vol dismissal, but I at least found one attorney and court who says vol dismissal is res j as to all issues which could have been litigated in the action voluntarily dismissed. So, this says to me the bankster canNOT voluntarily dismiss, change its story, and show up later.
And Nosek tells me that they can’t change clothes, either.
lay opinions – ask a lawyer or 10

THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OWNERS ARE CRIMINALLY DECEPTIVE CREDIT WHORES….THEY PEDDLE NOTHING BUT SECRETS, LIES, DECEPTION & FRAUD CALLED CREDIT SLIPS…THOSE CREDIT SLIPS ARE NOTHING BUT WEAPONS OF FINANCIAL FRAUD & MASS DESTRUCTION…..MIS & REPRESENTED TO WE THE PEOPLE AS SOMETHING OF VALUE BUT THOSE CREDIT SLIPS ARE NO MORE THAN CRIMINAL WEALTH STEALING….WEALTH DESTROYING INSTRUMENTS OF CRIME……WEAPONS OF FINANCIAL MASS DESTRUCTION……

Financial expert Josh Rosner on FOX BUSINESS said it was clear by 2007 that SECURITIZATION WAS A BANK PONZI SCHEME…..As a result of that, what we now have is the communization of credit in America……Rosner said the reason banks are not confident in the housing market is because of the “current state” of the housing market…Rosner said currently their are millions of credit agreements with numerous PSA AGREEMENTS ATTACHED …… FALSE REPS & WARRANTIES & THAT IS WHY THE FED ARE DUMPING THEIR FICTIONAL MBS’s upon these fictional trusts….RICO….

Tell the lousy, traitor skunk politicians WE THE PEOPLE DEMAND AN AUDIT OF THE PEOPLES TRUST FUND…….THE U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT …..WHY? WE THE PEOPLE PAY FOR EVERYTHING UPFRONT AND THAT IS WHERE THE TRUTH IS HIDDEN FROM US…….THE PROOF THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK….A PRIVATE BANK…. ARE IN DEFAULT TO THE U.S. TAXPAYERS FOR INNUMERABLE AMOUNTS OF U.S. TAXPAYER DOLLARS………

THAT IS WHY THE TRAITOR POLITICIANS NATIONALIZED TBTF TO ROB US & HIDE THE FACT THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK…..A PRIVATE BANK ARE INSOLVENT ON THEIR BALANCE SHEETS & OWE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE INNUMERABLE AMOUNTS OF MONEY….& GOLD BECAUSE THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK DOES NOT LEND ANYTHING……THE FED & WALL STREET ARE NOTHING BUT A VAST COUNTERFEITING, FORGERY, FRAUD & GAMBLING OPERATION WHO STEAL OUR WEALTH AND USE OUR STOLEN WEALTH TO DESTROY US AND GET FILTHY RICH FROM THAT THEFT & MANUFACTURED DESTRUCTION…..

What a week. I was able to get one judge to issue a Preliminary Injunction against Bank of America. Too bad they aren’t trying to sell my home. On Wednesday, I convinced another judge to come in at 0800 to hear my case, and he issued a temporary restraining order against all banks. Now to write the Order …. (Minutes entered into the record already.)

Dumping worthless credit slips into a PUBLIC TRUST or any TRUST after the INTENDED destruction of those credit slips occurred and then trying to gain or gaining UNJUST ENRICHMENT (STEALING) by way of CONCEALMENT OF THE FACT THESE ARE WORTHLESS CREDIT SLIPS (INTENT TO DECEIVE) in any way is EGREGIOUSLY & HEINOUSLY CRIMINAL…

NOTHING CHANGES THE TRUTH….The fact they entered unindorsed notes upon the court records……That means forever more, these crooks will have to PROVE ACCEPTANCE & CONSIDERATION…..and they CANNNOT….because all they did was SWAP CREDIT SLIPS & THAT CRIMINAL ACT BEGAN EVEN BEFORE THEY FRAUDULENTLY INDUCED US TO SIGN THAT NOTE & MORTGAGE…..Those FELONIES OF COUNTERFEITING, FORGERY AND FRAUD WERE UPON PRESENTMENT OF ANY DOCUMENT THEY ENTER UPON THE PUBLIC RECORD……& IT DID NOT COST THESE CROOKS A RED CENT….BUT MADE THEM GAZILLIONS…

I noticed the banks are up to another scam. I recently applied for a refinance with a couple of banks they all denied me. Because of my pending foreclosure. But one thing that happened with Wells Fargo that made me suspect something fishy is going on,is that after applying with wells fraudgo is that some paperwork came in the mail saying that I was approved,but my name is correct, my address is spelled wrong and some of my other info is wrong. I tryed to call the loan officer and he does not answer. I bet that Wells fargo took my info told several investors that I have good credit and got the loan amount I was looking for Several times from different investors. But meanwhile they told me I was denied. So right now Wells fargo took out several refinance loans with my name and they pocketed the money for my refi several times over . Wow I’ve been scamed

Shove it Christine…..TELL THE BANK OWNERS TO PAY US BACK WHAT THEY STOLE…..STOP USING THEIR CREDIT AMERICA….EVERYTIME WE PAY TAX…THE MORTGAGE…THE UTILITY BILLS ….BUY FOOD….GAS OR USE CREDIT THE FEDSTERS, THE BANK OWNERS ROB US….

PROOF the poor economy is completely manufactured…..CNBC REPORTING THE U.S. GOVERNMENT ARE EXPORTING OUR PETROLEUM AT A RECORD RATE AND THE POOR ECONOMY IS COMPLETELY MANUFACTURED..(BY THESE GLOBAL CORPORATE GOVERNMENT BANK WHORES..)